God makes angels and they rebel. Their sentence is "to continue being immortal and to walk the earth". God creates man and, because man did not understand sin, he makes man mortal and has a place called "hell".

Well that doesn't seem very fair does it? There's one rule for angels and another for mankind.

Lukvance... you are aware that angels aren't real, aren't you? They are just fairytale beings like dragons, vampires and elves.

The same rule apply for Human and Angels when it comes to sin. Satan and his angels are not in the state called heaven. They are in hell.You and me will join the angels in heaven or hell depending on our choice when we die.Angels are more real than dragons and elves.

Did it ever occur to you that an alternative explanation was that you were simply being more cognizant of and cautious not to hit the corner?If I am learning to ride a bicycle for the first time and find myself crashing on every attempt, and I pray to a god to keep me from crashing, when I eventually learn to ride the bike without crashing is it more likely due to my prayer being answered or simply because with continued practice I got better at it?

Of course I thought about that. But then I tried one day. I told to God in prayer "ok today I don't need you, I am able to not cut corners, anyway by now I have the habits" And I let you guess what happen. My little toe still remembers it. Plus this was only one of the many things I asked God to do "for me".

Of course I thought about that. But then I tried one day. I told to God in prayer "ok today I don't need you, I am able to not cut corners, anyway by now I have the habits" And I let you guess what happen.

So, am I to take away from this parable of yours that you cannot safely round a corner without invoking your God's good graces first?

Quote

Plus this was only one of the many things I asked God to do "for me".

I think you need to go with a different example, because quite frankly, your first one is not convincing anyone.

Logged

The cosmos is also within us. We are made of star stuff.

The only thing bigger than the universe is humanity's collective sense of self-importance.

Now what? Do we need to schedule a time so that I'm paying attention at the right moment, to see if for just a few seconds I believe in your god when you pray for me do so? Should I think really hard about believing in your god at the same time? Experiments are good, let's try a few.

I can pray for you to believe in God. If God was interfering without your consent you would be a believer now. That is proof that he does not intervene without your consent.The experiment I did was the following. For one week I was "open to discussion" with God. Praying and listening to his words. (I couldn't hear anything) During that week if anyone asked me, I was a believer. I started the week with going to the church and finished it after church the next Sunday. Of course being a believer came with things I was not used to like prayer, but it was good stuff anyway nothing that bother other people.After that week I didn't see or hear God. I didn't feel any different so I gave it another try (one more week), this time, because I heard the Sunday about how if you ask God something he will give it to you, I tested it. Of course I didn't want to ask God for big stuff like the loto or something like that so I ask for small stuff, always involving me but not the others. (I couldn't ask for Emy to be on time for example but I could ask for me to arrive at the same time that she did) I remember asking God to prevent me to hit myself on the corner. (I often did that back then, would it be my foot or my elbow or some part of my body, I was cutting corners too short) I asked for one day and 24h I hit myself, so I asked for the week. And it worked.I did test god for a couple of month and one day I had enough proof to believe that he was the correct one.

there were times in my life that I was open to discussion with god. he never spoke to me in a manner I would have attributed to god. I laid in bed sick with strep/asthma/bronchitis for days alone with my thoughts between when cartoons stopped and afternoon programming began. Silently in my room asking for guidence and I heard nothing.

In hindsight this is probably a good thing considering that I am not having a schizophrenic break from reality. Again the guy is able to create a universe, murder untold millions of species and people with a thought. I think he could have spoken in a way that a sickly teen seeking advice could have heard him in a silent room.

I do have to say my prayers were not quites as mundane as yours. maybe god could have helped me walk around corners or jump rope. But my prayers were for my sick grandma and grandpa and for me to get well. Eventually after 2 weeks I usually got better so I guess you could call that a prayer's answer. But being that it was right in keeping with expected outcome of my sickness I kinda went with typical immune response.

The fact that anyone would punish an innocent for someone else's transgressions is disgusting, and such a being is unworthy of praise. Period.

I totally agree with you. But no one is punishing anyone here. If you put your hand into the fire and it burns. Is it because the fire is punishing you?

Well let's take the punishment factor out of the equation and respin what Boots is saying (Boots, if you do not agree with the following please call me out on it):

The fact that anyone would allow an innocent person to suffer for someone else's transgressions is disgusting, and such a being is unworthy of praise. Period.orThe fact that anyone would not stop an innocent person from suffering for someone else's transgressions is disgusting, and such a being is unworthy of praise. Period.

If you are about to put your hand into the fire, and the person next to you knows that the fire will burn, and has the ability to not only stop you from putting your hand into the fire but also has the ability to explain why you shouldn't, would you say the person next to you acted in your best interest if they did NOTHING to stop you from putting your hand into the fire? If that person next to you knows that you do not wish to feel pain at that moment, and you don't know that putting your hand in fire causes pain, are they respecting your choice to not feel pain?

"When we landed on the moon, that was the point where god should have come up and said 'hello'. Because if you invent some creatures, put them on the blue one and they make it to the grey one, you f**king turn up and say 'well done'."

And god doesn't alleviate this terminal cancer that the 6-year old has because...?

I will have to look into the case more closely to give you all the reason why he does not cure the boy. Most of the time it is because the boy is a victim of our sin.

And god doesn't alleviate this terminal cancer that the 6-year old has because...? Even if it is due to our sin, it's not due to the 6-year old's sin. THE 6-YEAR OLD IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR HIS/HER TERMINAL CANCER, and your suggestion that it should be the case is, frankly, disturbing.

Quote

Quote

Regardless, I'm not exactly sure what your point is with the above. And I'm really not sure that we're using the word 'care' in the same way. Because if person A would stop a rape in progress and person B would not stop a rape in progress, then I would say that person A was a more caring person than person B. I'd feel even worse about person B if he told me he wouldn't stop the rape in progress because he wouldn't want to impede on the rapist's free will.

I totally agree with you. We can impose our will unto others. Would it be to attack them (as the rapist did) or to rescue them (against the rapist).

Quote

Which choice? In my example, god is totally letting the rapist decide to 'rape' or 'not rape'. That choice isn't being taken away from the rapist.

Well, if the rapist is spoofed away he would not be able to do what he wants to do.

The *poofing* away wouldn't happen until the point in time where the rapist has made the choice to rape.

Quote

Quote

I'm rather sure that being raped was against the woman's choice, in the same way that I'm rather sure that getting terminal cancer was against the 6-year old's choice.

Me too. They are both victims of someone else sin.

And the loving god who's watching these people suffer not of their own accord - not of their own choice - doesn't do anything. Because freedom. Even though healing these people or stopping their suffering would not remove any of their freedoms.

Logged

"When we landed on the moon, that was the point where god should have come up and said 'hello'. Because if you invent some creatures, put them on the blue one and they make it to the grey one, you f**king turn up and say 'well done'."

And god doesn't alleviate this terminal cancer that the 6-year old has because...?

I will have to look into the case more closely to give you all the reason why he does not cure the boy. Most of the time it is because the boy is a victim of our sin.

And god doesn't alleviate this terminal cancer that the 6-year old has because...? Even if it is due to our sin, it's not due to the 6-year old's sin. THE 6-YEAR OLD IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR HIS/HER TERMINAL CANCER, and your suggestion that it should be the case is, frankly, disturbing.

Quote

Quote

Regardless, I'm not exactly sure what your point is with the above. And I'm really not sure that we're using the word 'care' in the same way. Because if person A would stop a rape in progress and person B would not stop a rape in progress, then I would say that person A was a more caring person than person B. I'd feel even worse about person B if he told me he wouldn't stop the rape in progress because he wouldn't want to impede on the rapist's free will.

I totally agree with you. We can impose our will unto others. Would it be to attack them (as the rapist did) or to rescue them (against the rapist).

Quote

Which choice? In my example, god is totally letting the rapist decide to 'rape' or 'not rape'. That choice isn't being taken away from the rapist.

Well, if the rapist is spoofed away he would not be able to do what he wants to do.

The *poofing* away wouldn't happen until the point in time where the rapist has made the choice to rape.

Quote

Quote

I'm rather sure that being raped was against the woman's choice, in the same way that I'm rather sure that getting terminal cancer was against the 6-year old's choice.

Me too. They are both victims of someone else sin.

And the loving god who's watching these people suffer not of their own accord - not of their own choice - doesn't do anything. Because freedom. Even though healing these people or stopping their suffering would not remove any of their freedoms.

luk

allowing the rapist to have free will strips the womans right to free will from her.

some skepisms, 1. "I have not seen God. I have felt the invisible presence"2. What if there is a rock in the middle of a road, a blind person is speeding towards it, ...they say that they can't see it. Would you recommend him to keep speeding?

The subject come often during the many replies I post. Since the answer is the same, I thought I would create a Thread that I could link to.My statement is the following.God is omnipotent indeed. He chose to not interfere directly without our consent in our lives because he created us free. He decided that being free is more important than all the sin in the world. It might not be the case one day, and that day might be the end of the world.

Does having a gun put to one's head interfere with one's free will?If yes, how is the threat of hell any different?

Yes. There is no threat of hell. Hell is a consequence of the choices you make. Like pulling the trigger has for consequence you going to jail. Saying no to God has for consequence you going to hell.Should we allow killers to kill without putting them to jail?

The bolded is a false analogy. A more apt analogy would be;

Glorious Leader is running for re-election. You have the choice to vote for him or not, but if you vote against him he will imprison and torture you.

Imprisonment and torture is simply the consequence for voting against Glorious Leader. Should he not imprison and torture people who vote against him?

And god doesn't alleviate this terminal cancer that the 6-year old has because...?

I will have to look into the case more closely to give you all the reason why he does not cure the boy. Most of the time it is because the boy is a victim of our sin.

Quote

Why did you capitalize the word 'more' above?

Sorry , I started the phrase with "more" then added "even" and did not make the change after.

Quote

Regardless, I'm not exactly sure what your point is with the above. And I'm really not sure that we're using the word 'care' in the same way. Because if person A would stop a rape in progress and person B would not stop a rape in progress, then I would say that person A was a more caring person than person B. I'd feel even worse about person B if he told me he wouldn't stop the rape in progress because he wouldn't want to impede on the rapist's free will.

I totally agree with you. We can impose our will unto others. Would it be to attack them (as the rapist did) or to rescue them (against the rapist).

Quote

Which choice? In my example, god is totally letting the rapist decide to 'rape' or 'not rape'. That choice isn't being taken away from the rapist.

Well, if the rapist is spoofed away he would not be able to do what he wants to do.

Quote

I'm rather sure that being raped was against the woman's choice, in the same way that I'm rather sure that getting terminal cancer was against the 6-year old's choice.

Me too. They are both victims of someone else sin.

Okay, if some guy walked in on a rapist about to commit rape, and stood by and did nothing to intervene, he would not be considered good or moral. Even to protect the rapists "free will". Valuable as it may be, "free will" is trumped by the victim's well being.

I can pray for you to believe in God. If God was interfering without your consent you would be a believer now. That is proof that he does not intervene without your consent.

So basically, you are saying "If you believe in God, you will believe in God." Well that's not very clever, is it?

Quote

The experiment I did was the following. For one week I was "open to discussion" with God. ... I ask for small stuff, always involving me but not the others. ... I remember asking God to prevent me to hit myself on the corner... I asked for one day and 24h I hit myself, so I asked for the week. And it worked.I did test god for a couple of month and one day I had enough proof to believe that he was the correct one.

That is not an experiment. You had no control example. You were conduction the experiment and you were the subject of the experiment... do you see a conflict?

If you are about to put your hand into the fire, and the person next to you knows that the fire will burn, and has the ability to not only stop you from putting your hand into the fire but also has the ability to explain why you shouldn't, would you say the person next to you acted in your best interest if they did NOTHING to stop you from putting your hand into the fire?

No. That is why God send people on hearth to warn you about the danger of the "fire" (like your parents for instance).

Quote

If that person next to you knows that you do not wish to feel pain at that moment, and you don't know that putting your hand in fire causes pain, are they respecting your choice to not feel pain?

I don't understand the question. In the analogy the person knows that putting his hand into the fire burns. Respecting their choice would be to let them burn themselves. (or tattoo themselves)

I will have to look into the case more closely to give you all the reason why he does not cure the boy. Most of the time it is because the boy is a victim of our sin.

And god doesn't alleviate this terminal cancer that the 6-year old has because...? Even if it is due to our sin, it's not due to the 6-year old's sin. THE 6-YEAR OLD IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR HIS/HER TERMINAL CANCER, and your suggestion that it should be the case is, frankly, disturbing.

Bold for emphasis. How do you jump to such a conclusion from what I wrote!?!?!?!? You are the one suggesting such an horror.

Quote

The *poofing* away wouldn't happen until the point in time where the rapist has made the choice to rape.

Even if the initial choice is made, a lot more will come later, every second the guy is making choices.

Quote

And the loving god who's watching these people suffer not of their own accord - not of their own choice - doesn't do anything. Because freedom. Even though healing these people or stopping their suffering would not remove any of their freedoms.

Maybe not their freedom but someone else freedom surely. What do you see in the big picture?Do you want to bring up one of your experiences like epidemics? Maybe it will be better than invented situations.

Okay, if some guy walked in on a rapist about to commit rape, and stood by and did nothing to intervene, he would not be considered good or moral. Even to protect the rapists "free will". Valuable as it may be, "free will" is trumped by the victim's well being.

I'm not sure I understand you. But the guy should intervene and use his "free will" to force the rapist to stop.

I can pray for you to believe in God. If God was interfering without your consent you would be a believer now. That is proof that he does not intervene without your consent.

So basically, you are saying "If you believe in God, you will believe in God." Well that's not very clever, is it?

Bold for emphasis. That was the reason why I was answering to someone else than you. He asked me for an example to support the fact that God doesn't intervene without consent (God does not force his will unto people) please, follow the discussion.

Quote

That is not an experiment. You had no control example. You were conduction the experiment and you were the subject of the experiment... do you see a conflict?

It is not an experiment to your liking I concur. It is an experiment nonetheless. Maybe experiment is not the right word for it. I tried something. Is that better?

How do you jump to such a conclusion from what I wrote!?!?!?!? You are the one suggesting such an horror.

jdawg was not the only one to reach that conclusion, Luk. Both Boots and myself agree with him. You are the one suggesting that there is a link between a 6 year old's cancer and "our sins" (your exact words) and not "his sins" (which is equally an outrageous explanation), which most definitely suggests that his suffering was the direct result of something not of his own doing.

Edited to remove double word

« Last Edit: May 22, 2014, 08:48:05 PM by Disciple of Sagan »

Logged

The cosmos is also within us. We are made of star stuff.

The only thing bigger than the universe is humanity's collective sense of self-importance.

jdawg was not the only one to reach that conclusion, Luk. Both Boots and myself agree with him. You are the one suggesting that there is a link between a 6 year old's cancer and "our sins" (your exact words) and not "his sins" (which is equally an outrageous explanation), which most definitely suggests that his suffering was the direct result of something not of his own doing.

Did you read his conclusion? " THE 6-YEAR OLD IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR HIS/HER TERMINAL CANCER, and your suggestion that it should be the case" Means that he thinks that according to me the kid is responsible for his cancer. THAT IS NOT WHAT I AM SAYING. Of course his suffering is the result of something that he did not do purposely. (like live in a house full of carcinogenic mold)

Quote

I am assuming that you are talking figuratively here. Are you?

No. You too can't do it without him.

Quote

Every now and then you have to offer up a "refresher" prayer to keep from being a klutz?

No. I asked him to protect me until the day I die. But it's funny, when I hit a corner these days (which is very rare) it reminds me that Ì have a sin I didn't ask for forgiveness yet. It's my "sin reminder" if you want haha.

Did you read his conclusion? " THE 6-YEAR OLD IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR HIS/HER TERMINAL CANCER, and your suggestion that it should be the case" Means that he thinks that according to me the kid is responsible for his cancer. THAT IS NOT WHAT I AM SAYING. Of course his suffering is the result of something that he did not do purposely. (like live in a house full of carcinogenic mold)

You had chosen your words poorly, then. Did you really expect those who had read your initial response, and I quote, "the boy is a victim of our sin" to be able to translate that in to "the boy is a victim of a naturally occurring cause of cancer"? Can you at least tell me you can now see how your initial comment would create a misunderstanding?

Quote

No. You too can't do it without him.

Oh, yes I most certainly can. By this point in my life, I must be so chock-full of unforgiven sin that I should have stopped breathing years ago. Not only that, I can somehow manage to get through life day-in and day-out without stubbing my toe on a corner. haha.

Logged

The cosmos is also within us. We are made of star stuff.

The only thing bigger than the universe is humanity's collective sense of self-importance.

Catholicism is sounding more and more like an institution deliberately designed to cultivate obsessive-compulsive disorder in its adherents. Pray for forgiveness so that one doesn't stub one's toe?

I think that a decent mindfulness practice would achieve the same goal more efficiently, with the added benefits of making the world seem more alive and immediate, and cultivate more coherent thinking as well.

Catholicism is sounding more and more like an institution deliberately designed to cultivate obsessive-compulsive disorder in its adherents. Pray for forgiveness so that one doesn't stub one's toe?

I think that a decent mindfulness practice would achieve the same goal more efficiently, with the added benefits of making the world seem more alive and immediate, and cultivate more coherent thinking as well.

I'm sorry you misunderstood me. I don't pray for forgiveness so that I don't hit myself, I realize that I am saying no to God's (that's all sin is about) protection when I hit myself. You remember when I said I asked for his protection until the day I die? So God won't protect me when I don't want him in my life. I hope you understand me better now.

You had chosen your words poorly, then. Did you really expect those who had read your initial response, and I quote, "the boy is a victim of our sin" to be able to translate that in to "the boy is a victim of a naturally occurring cause of cancer"? Can you at least tell me you can now see how your initial comment would create a misunderstanding?

No. Sorry I seem to lack English comprehension on that particular case.

Quote

Oh, yes I most certainly can. By this point in my life, I must be so chock-full of unforgiven sin that I should have stopped breathing years ago. Not only that, I can somehow manage to get through life day-in and day-out without stubbing my toe on a corner. haha.

God does not abandon you when you don't want him (when you sin). He stays close to you and wait for you to accept him into you life.

I don't repeatedly make mistakes and stub my toe. I make a conscious decision to adjust my direction of travel until it becomes muscle memory to avoid it and thankfully I have been successful.

I want you to try an experiment, I think it is valid. Go 50 yards into the woods near your house with a skeptical non believer facilitator, , close your eyes spin around 6 times, sit down meditate, ask for forgiveness and guidance and run as fast as you can back to the clearing. No peeking. No matter how many times you try this experiment I believe the results will be the same. Can you document your attempt with a video?

for the purposes of this test make sure the woods has at least an average tree density of 10 feet.

if you want to modify it a little for safety, I think a Mall parkinglot with a non believing skeptical member of this site that lives local to you. We can travel to a mall parkinglot and have you run 100 yards black hooded and disoriented at top speed. 3 sprints. Again video evidence would be appreciated.